 |
Search Sci.Electronics.Basics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Sci.Electronics.Basics -> Why Is DC Power Transmission 10X More Efficient Than AC?
There are 77 messages in this thread.
You are currently looking at messages 60 to 77.
|
Author: Y.PoratDate: 00:56 27-04-08
|
|
On Apr 27, 6:53=A0am, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
> --
> This message is brought to you by Androcles
> =A0http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
>
> "Paul E. Schoen" <pst...@smart.net> wrote in
messagenews:4813cc89$0$19806$=
ecde5a14@news.coretel.net...
> || "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
>
> |news:9aLQj.13882$Yy6.9158@newsfe11.ams2...
> | >
> | >
> | > --
> | > This message is brought to you by Androcles
> | > =A0http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
> | >
> | > "The Ghost In The Machine" <ew...@sirius.tg00suus7038.net>
wrote in
> | > message
> | >news:7bsbe5-s07.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
> | > |
> | > | I do wonder. =A0We were born about a century too late;
> | > | Tesla and Edison produced various papers and/or actions
> | > | (including electrocutions!) based on AC (Tesla) and DC
> | > | (Edison).
> | > |
> | > | Tesla won, as it turns out.
> | >
> | >
> | > If you have a high voltage then you can use less current and
> | > you only need a small conductor ... but then you need to
> | > step it down again for safety in domestic applications.
> | > The transformer and AC makes it all possible. Edison's DC
> | > was not a option, there are no DC transformers (or AC
> | > batteries) - besides which a DC generator needs an expensive
> | > commutator.
> |
> | DC generators with commutators are 19th century technology.
>
> My goodness... you are right, how could I have missed that?
> And Edison lived when?
>
> | Solid state
> | converters and inverters are essentially DC transformers, but would have=
> | been only wet dreams to Edison and Tesla. It may be that Tesla was the
> | winner (although not financially and emotionally), but Edison may prove =
to
> | be the winner by a few percentage points as solid state technology becom=
es
> | cheaper and more efficient.
>
> Take down the wires between the pylons and beam the energy across country
> using masers, huh?
> And for the next wet dream we'll have big mirrors in space focussing
> sunlight
> on Antarctica to terra-form it, melt that damned ice and show those tree
> huggers
> some new trees to cuddle up to while we get on with a bit of rape and
> plunder
> of the mineral wealth there. All the crap about global warming and we've
> a whole continent to explore. Too much water? Syphon some off and
> leave it on the Moon. All it takes is energy and the Sun has more than
> enough.
>
> |
> | High voltage is more efficient and practical because insulation is much
> | cheaper and lighter weight than copper, silver, aluminum, or other good
> | conductors.
>
> Oh, I didn't know HV power lines were insulated...
>
> | And superconductors are not practical for really long
> | transmission.
>
> Superconductors are only a wet dream to Edison and Tesla.
>
> | AC at high voltage will have some losses due to radiation,
> | inductance, capacitance, and phase shift, as well as resistance, corona
> and
> | insulator leakage, which affect both AC and DC.
>
> Losses due to phase shift, huh? =A0Power factor correction wasn't
> an Edison and Tesla wet dream, was it?
>
> | A balanced three phase, 3
> | wire system transfers 50% more power than a two wire DC system with the
> | same size wires, and the same voltage to ground, but the AC system will
> | have inductive and capacitive losses, requires 40% better insulation to
> | handle peaks, and may have shorter insulator life due to capacitive
> | current.
>
> Capacitive losses? =A0They get hot, those nasty capacitors...
>
> | Also, the AC system is often not well balanced, which puts extra
> | load on one of the conductors and consequently higher losses.
> | A DC system can also use the earth (possibly with a smaller buried
> | conductor) for a return path, which shifts efficiency in its favor as
> | compared to AC.
>
> That sounds like an Edison wet dream to me. Just connect to the steel
> frame of the building and the copper pipes from the bathtub. Very useful
> for fluorescent lights, I'm sure.
>
> | But maybe Tesla will prove to be the ultimate winner if his methods of
> | transmitting power by means of atmospheric and earth resonance ever prov=
e
> | to be practical and safe.
> |
> Got any more wet dreams for us?
> There is no "ultimate", we go with what we have... NOW. And the process
> will continue to evolve until it blows up in all our faces.
>
> Man, as a species, has survived without technology for 2-3 million years.
> What science and technology have done is caused massive overpopulation.
> That CANNOT continue. We live in the Golden Age preceding the mighty
> crash that will be as dark an age as the demise of the dinosaur, and we ar=
e
> doing it to ourselves.
--------------------
it is worth to listen to Androcless
about thinges he makes sense !!
ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Author: Michael A. TerrellDate: 01:39 27-04-08
|
|
"Paul E. Schoen" wrote:
>
> The lines themselves are not insulated, but they are suspended on insulting
> bushings, and of course air itself is an insulator.
I've never seen an insulting bushing. ;-)
--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
Use any search engine other than Google till they stop polluting USENET
with porn and junk commercial SPAM
If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
|
|
|
|
Author: AndroclesDate: 01:43 27-04-08
|
|
This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
"Paul E. Schoen" <pstech@smart.net> wrote in message
news:4814046b$0$19789$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net...
|
| "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
| news:mNSQj.150204$cj2.79114@newsfe13.ams2...
| >
| >
| > --
| > This message is brought to you by Androcles
| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
| >
| > "Paul E. Schoen" <pstech@smart.net> wrote in message
| > news:4813cc89$0$19806$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net...
| > |
| > | High voltage is more efficient and practical because insulation is
much
| > | cheaper and lighter weight than copper, silver, aluminum, or other
good
| > | conductors.
| >
| >
| > Oh, I didn't know HV power lines were insulated...
|
| The lines themselves are not insulated, but they are suspended on
insulting
| bushings,
Which are cheaper and lighter weight than aluminium or other good
conductors?
| and of course air itself is an insulator.
Now that raises an interesting question.
In a CRT the electron beam passes through vacuum ( a conductor, of course),
so let air in and it's a DC insulator (of course). But is it an AC
insulator?
|
| >
| > | AC at high voltage will have some losses due to radiation,
| > | inductance, capacitance, and phase shift, as well as resistance,
corona
| > | and insulator leakage, which affect both AC and DC.
| >
| > Losses due to phase shift, huh? Power factor correction wasn't
| > an Edison and Tesla wet dream, was it?
| >
| > | A balanced three phase, 3
| > | wire system transfers 50% more power than a two wire DC system with
the
| > | same size wires, and the same voltage to ground, but the AC system
will
| > | have inductive and capacitive losses, requires 40% better insulation
to
| > | handle peaks, and may have shorter insulator life due to capacitive
| > | current.
| >
| > Capacitive losses? They get hot, those nasty capacitors...
|
| Insulators have their own capacitance, and power factor correction
| capacitors have some losses from ESR. Also, their cost of procurement and
| maintenance need to be factored into the overall efficiency.
So a Lamborghini is less efficient than a Ford due to its procurement and
maintenance cost? I learn something new every day.
| > | Also, the AC system is often not well balanced, which puts extra
| > | load on one of the conductors and consequently higher losses.
| > | A DC system can also use the earth (possibly with a smaller buried
| > | conductor) for a return path, which shifts efficiency in its favor as
| > | compared to AC.
| >
| > That sounds like an Edison wet dream to me. Just connect to the steel
| > frame of the building and the copper pipes from the bathtub. Very useful
| > for fluorescent lights, I'm sure.
|
| It's already being done for some transmission lines. But I would not
| advocate earth ground return path for distribution.
Funny that the return path carries no current in a balanced three phase 3
wire
system... that would make earth an ideal return path with nothing to return,
wouldn't it? You can't do that with DC.
| >
| > | But maybe Tesla will prove to be the ultimate winner if his methods of
| > | transmitting power by means of atmospheric and earth resonance ever
| > prove
| > | to be practical and safe.
| > |
| > Got any more wet dreams for us?
| > There is no "ultimate", we go with what we have... NOW. And the process
| > will continue to evolve until it blows up in all our faces.
| >
| > Man, as a species, has survived without technology for 2-3 million
years.
| > What science and technology have done is caused massive overpopulation.
| > That CANNOT continue. We live in the Golden Age preceding the mighty
| > crash that will be as dark an age as the demise of the dinosaur, and we
| > are
| > doing it to ourselves.
|
| Now that is something with which I can at least partially agree. We, the
| "enlightened" people of the industrial and technological age, are exerting
| unprecedented stresses on our fragile biosphere, and a privileged and
| greedy few are reaping temporary financial benefits from human activities
| that simply cannot continue on a sustainable basis. The world population
| continues to rise, and much of that increase is composed of individuals
who
| are genetically and behaviorally challenged so that they reperesent more
of
| a burden than an asset in the grand scheme of things. Dogmatic religions
| oppose any sort of limitations or social engineering, yet will not take
| direct responsibility for the continued supervision, care, and protective
| containment of those who make negative contributions to the advancement of
| civilization. And business models and economic metrics require ever
| increasing growth as a requirement for success, which encourages
| conspicuous consumption, planned obsolescence, depletion of resources, and
| waste of energy.
|
| The long-bearded old weirdo in robes has been professing that "The end is
| near", and perhaps that is becoming more of a reality that we could see in
| our lifetimes.
|
| Paul
Yep... that's evolution in action and there isn't a damn thing anyone
can do about it.
Mr. and Mrs. Microbe live in a petri dish for 2 minutes and die, but first
they reproduce and double the population in 1 minute.
http://www.epa.gov/mold/images/petreidish.jpg
The process begins at 11:00 pm and continues until midnight when the dish
is full, all the agar nutrient is eaten and all microbes die, but first they
slaughter each other for the last remaining nutrient. What time was it when
the dish was half full?
Is getting another dish a solution?
|
|
|
|
Author: Paul E. SchoenDate: 03:41 27-04-08
|
|
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:lOGdnfIrON0MjInVnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
>
> "Paul E. Schoen" wrote:
>>
>> The lines themselves are not insulated, but they are suspended on
>> insulting
>> bushings, and of course air itself is an insulator.
>
>
> I've never seen an insulting bushing. ;-)
I was wondering if anyone would catch that... You win!!!
Actually if an insulator broke off and fell on my head, it would be quite
insulting :)
Paul
|
|
|
|
Author: Bret CahillDate: 09:43 27-04-08
|
|
> >> The lines themselves are not insulated, but they are suspended on
> >> insulting
> >> bushings, and of course air itself is an insulator.
> > =EF=BF=BD I've never seen an insulting bushing. ;-)
> I was wondering if anyone would catch that...
Now that you've 'fessed up you need to go to www.newsgroupstypos.com
and get on their 7 step program, just like those rehab clinics in
Arizona that treat sex offenders.
Insulator cost vs conductor cost doesn't change anything but
explicitly stating it is still an interesting [more general] way to
present the problem.
After all, if aluminum was $0.0001/lb you could just lay 3 foot
diameter bar on the ground and run high current/low voltage. I'm
guessing someone has already tried that somewhere.
You could eliminate all those unsightly dangerous crop duster snagging
overheat wires.
WHOOooops! I just made a typo. Now I have to go back on the program.
Or maybe sue for malpractice . . .
Bret Cahill
|
|
|
|
Author: EeyoreDate: 12:53 27-04-08
|
|
Bret Cahill wrote:
> > > > Presumably, 99.2%. �The loss for 92% efficiency
> > > > is 8%; reducing that loss by a factor of 10
> > > > generates 0.8%.
> >
> > > The 8% figure is an average and an arbitrary one at that.
> >
> > > The only reason the 92% efficiency figure appeared is because electric
> > > power just isn't shipped thousands of miles when it is cheaper to
> > > build plants in every town and ship the fuel instead.
> >
> > > The situation changes if a power plant needs to be in a very remote
> > > location like the Sahara. Â To ship the solar thermal
> >
> > Solar thermal isn't electricity, it's heat. I assume you mean PV solar.
>
> I think it's a solar trough vapor cycle. Anyway a turbine drives an
> alternator in the desert. The voltage is stepped up, rectified,
> probably filtered and transmitted to Finland by HVDC where it is
> inverted back to ac.
>
> > > back to N. Europe would waste 1/2 the energy using HVAC.
>
> > Why do you think that ? Is there any scientific rationale for it ?
>
> Do the math. If 8% is lost every 200 km using HVAC, then 0.92^8 is
> lost going 1600 km.
Who says 8% every 200 km ?
Graham
|
|
|
|
Author: Michael A. TerrellDate: 13:37 27-04-08
|
|
"Paul E. Schoen" wrote:
>
> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:lOGdnfIrON0MjInVnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
> >
> > "Paul E. Schoen" wrote:
> >>
> >> The lines themselves are not insulated, but they are suspended on
> >> insulting
> >> bushings, and of course air itself is an insulator.
> >
> >
> > I've never seen an insulting bushing. ;-)
>
> I was wondering if anyone would catch that... You win!!!
>
> Actually if an insulator broke off and fell on my head, it would be quite
> insulting :)
More like injuring. 10 pounds of ceramic with a sharp edge falling 60
feet or more could kill you. :(
--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
Use any search engine other than Google till they stop polluting USENET
with porn and junk commercial SPAM
If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
|
|
|
|
Author: Paul E. SchoenDate: 14:22 27-04-08
|
|
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:DK2dneaOBs1sJInVnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>
> "Paul E. Schoen" wrote:
>>
>> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in
message
>> news:lOGdnfIrON0MjInVnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
>> >
>> > "Paul E. Schoen" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> The lines themselves are not insulated, but they are suspended on
>> >> insulting
>> >> bushings, and of course air itself is an insulator.
>> >
>> >
>> > I've never seen an insulting bushing. ;-)
>>
>> I was wondering if anyone would catch that... You win!!!
>>
>> Actually if an insulator broke off and fell on my head, it would be
>> quite
>> insulting :)
>
>
> More like injuring. 10 pounds of ceramic with a sharp edge falling 60
> feet or more could kill you. :(
Actually, "insult" is a medical term that means an injury or an incident
that can result in injury:
http://medical.merriam-webster.com/medical/insult
I have heard my brother in law (who is a medical researcher) use the term
to describe things to which people subject their body, that eventually
cause cancer or other disease.
Paul
|
|
|
|
Author: Michael A. TerrellDate: 15:55 27-04-08
|
|
"Paul E. Schoen" wrote:
>
> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:DK2dneaOBs1sJInVnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
> >
> > More like injuring. 10 pounds of ceramic with a sharp edge falling 60
> > feet or more could kill you. :(
>
> Actually, "insult" is a medical term that means an injury or an incident
> that can result in injury:
>
> http://medical.merriam-webster.com/medical/insult
>
> I have heard my brother in law (who is a medical researcher) use the term
> to describe things to which people subject their body, that eventually
> cause cancer or other disease.
Some doctors are an insult to your health, as well. I am diabetic,
(along with other problems) and have had a problem with pressure sores
on my lower legs for almost two years. The first doctor blamed me for
them, and the second ignored them. All they cared about was that I took
all the medicene they prescribed. The swellling and sores got so bad
that it lookedlike I was going to lose both legs. One of the things they
kept harping on was that I use absolutely no salt in my diet. A little
over a month ago I decided what the hell. If they were going to start
cutting off body parts, I might as well enjoy my meals for whatever time
I had left. I went back to the level i was using 15 years ago, and
within three days they sores started to heal. In two weeks they went
from 30+ to two. The swelling in my fett wasn't as bad, the migrane
headches stopped. I was very hat intolerant, but I can take about 15
degrees more, without AC. My vision is better, my balance has improved,
I have lost about five pounds, and I am regaining some strength. After
some research, it turns out that almost every medcine I am on lowers
sodium, potassium, or both levels in your blood. My electtrolytes were
all screwed up, and it was slowly killing me.
--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
Use any search engine other than Google till they stop polluting USENET
with porn and junk commercial SPAM
If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
|
|
|
|
Author: Bret CahillDate: 20:23 27-04-08
|
|
Try my < $2/lb diet.
The UC Berkeley _Wellness Letter_ once published a letter claiming
that, if it costs less than 19 cents/lb, it's healthy.
My theory was 19 cents/lb is the cost to load roots from a field onto
a truck + the cost to unload the truck at a market.
In any event, it's affordable.
Bret Cahill
|
|
|
|
Author: Michael A. TerrellDate: 20:41 27-04-08
|
|
Bret Cahill wrote:
>
> Try my < $2/lb diet.
>
> The UC Berkeley _Wellness Letter_ once published a letter claiming
> that, if it costs less than 19 cents/lb, it's healthy.
>
> My theory was 19 cents/lb is the cost to load roots from a field onto
> a truck + the cost to unload the truck at a market.
>
> In any event, it's affordable.
It might be affordable, but not right for everyone. Any deviations
in my current diet make me so sick that I can't function.
--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
Use any search engine other than Google till they stop polluting USENET
with porn and junk commercial SPAM
If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
|
|
|
|
Author: Paul E. SchoenDate: 01:23 28-04-08
|
|
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:yYCdncvshcm6R4nVnZ2dnUVZ_h2pnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>
> "Paul E. Schoen" wrote:
>>
>> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in
message
>> news:DK2dneaOBs1sJInVnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>> >
>> > More like injuring. 10 pounds of ceramic with a sharp edge falling
>> > 60
>> > feet or more could kill you. :(
>>
>> Actually, "insult" is a medical term that means an injury or an
incident
>> that can result in injury:
>>
>> http://medical.merriam-webster.com/medical/insult
>>
>> I have heard my brother in law (who is a medical researcher) use the
>> term
>> to describe things to which people subject their body, that eventually
>> cause cancer or other disease.
>
>
> Some doctors are an insult to your health, as well. I am diabetic,
> (along with other problems) and have had a problem with pressure sores
> on my lower legs for almost two years. The first doctor blamed me for
> them, and the second ignored them. All they cared about was that I took
> all the medicene they prescribed. The swellling and sores got so bad
> that it lookedlike I was going to lose both legs. One of the things they
> kept harping on was that I use absolutely no salt in my diet. A little
> over a month ago I decided what the hell. If they were going to start
> cutting off body parts, I might as well enjoy my meals for whatever time
> I had left. I went back to the level i was using 15 years ago, and
> within three days they sores started to heal. In two weeks they went
> from 30+ to two. The swelling in my fett wasn't as bad, the migrane
> headches stopped. I was very hat intolerant, but I can take about 15
> degrees more, without AC. My vision is better, my balance has improved,
> I have lost about five pounds, and I am regaining some strength. After
> some research, it turns out that almost every medcine I am on lowers
> sodium, potassium, or both levels in your blood. My electtrolytes were
> all screwed up, and it was slowly killing me.
It is amazing how much we need to take charge of our own health, and how
much doctors rely on simply treating everything with the latest pill,
rather than focus on the root causes such as diet, exercise, and attitude.
I have never believed in the evils of salt, but I do know some people who
dump it on their food until their veggies look like snow capped mountains.
There is a need for salt, as you have seen, and any sort of fanaticism in
diet can be unhealthy. A friend, who is pretty much a "health food nut",
told me of his latest discoveries that the body must be kept alkaline, and
an excessively acid condition causes disease. See:
http://www.acid-alkaline-diet.com/
http://www.a-better-way.com/naturalhealthschool/acid-alkaline.html
http://preventdisease.com/fitness/nutrition/articles/acid_alkaline.html
http://www.ctds.info/acidic-foods.html
A possibly more scientific viewpoint is:
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/DSH/coral2.html
I once found a reference that claimed the body cannot use regular table
salt for its sodium requirement, and that it must first pass through the
vegetable kingdom, and be "chelated". But I'm not sure that's true:
http://www.supplementquality.com/z_askexpert/chelated.html
Here's information I found about sodium:
http://health.rutgers.edu/nutrition/sodium.htm
http://www.healthvitaminsguide.com/minerals/sodium.htm
Here is a (probably a bit wacky) pro-salt site:
http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/salt.htm
I know you can do your own searches, but I found these to be interesting
and informative.
HTH,
Paul
========================
PS: I and some friends will be doing a sing-along for disabled and elderly
veterans at the Perry Point VA Hospital this Sunday. I have done this many
times before, and it is a rewarding experience for them and us. I was very
pleased to learn that one bedridden patient was tapping his foot to our
music, and he had been largely unresponsive previously. Many of these
patients no longer have family or friends to visit them and they are living
out their last days in lonely isolation. It is the least I can do to spend
some time entertaining them and providing some interaction with the outside
world. They have given so much, and we who have benefited from their
service and sacrifices must never forget them.
|
|
|
|
Author: Bret CahillDate: 13:16 28-04-08
|
|
> I once found a reference that claimed the body cannot use regular table
> salt for its sodium requirement, and that it must first pass through the
> vegetable kingdom, and be "chelated".
I thought salt doesn't react with anything in any way but first rate
gourmet cook claims that salt cannot always be added after cooking and
have the same effect.
Bret Cahill
|
|
|
|
Author: Stephen J. RushDate: 13:57 28-04-08
|
|
On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 10:16:52 -0700, Bret Cahill wrote:
>> I once found a reference that claimed the body cannot use regular table
>> salt for its sodium requirement, and that it must first pass through
>> the vegetable kingdom, and be "chelated".
>
> I thought salt doesn't react with anything in any way but first rate
> gourmet cook claims that salt cannot always be added after cooking and
> have the same effect.
Why shouldn't salt react? It dissolves easily in water and provides two
very active ions. There are free (not chelated) sodium and chloride ions
in your body fluids, and your body doesn't care where they came from.
Chemical reactions are sensitive to temperature; things that happen
quickly at cooking temperatures happen more slowly at serving
temperatures, so I would expect salt in the pot to have at least slightly
different effects from salt at the table. The food also spends more time
in the pot or the oven than it does on your plate.
|
|
|
|
Author: daestromDate: 19:36 28-04-08
|
|
"Stephen J. Rush" <sjrush@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:weOdnWEIc52HjYvVnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 10:16:52 -0700, Bret Cahill wrote:
>
>>> I once found a reference that claimed the body cannot use regular table
>>> salt for its sodium requirement, and that it must first pass through
>>> the vegetable kingdom, and be "chelated".
>>
>> I thought salt doesn't react with anything in any way but first rate
>> gourmet cook claims that salt cannot always be added after cooking and
>> have the same effect.
>
> Why shouldn't salt react? It dissolves easily in water and provides two
> very active ions. There are free (not chelated) sodium and chloride ions
> in your body fluids, and your body doesn't care where they came from.
> Chemical reactions are sensitive to temperature; things that happen
> quickly at cooking temperatures happen more slowly at serving
> temperatures, so I would expect salt in the pot to have at least slightly
> different effects from salt at the table. The food also spends more time
> in the pot or the oven than it does on your plate.
>
Another point about salt intake is iodine. Common salt bought in stores is
'iodized'. That is, it has a trace of the element iodine added to it.
Using non-iodized salt or no salt at all and you run the risk of having a
deficiency of iodine in your body. This can lead to a goiter (swelling of
the thyroid) as well as other conditions.
Another good source of iodine is seafood, but if you're allergic or don't
eat salt-water fish, you may need iodized salt to prevent such a dificiency.
daestrom
|
|
|
|
Author: AndroclesDate: 22:00 28-04-08
|
|
This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
"Stephen J. Rush" <sjrush@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:weOdnWEIc52HjYvVnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d@comcast.com...
| On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 10:16:52 -0700, Bret Cahill wrote:
|
| >> I once found a reference that claimed the body cannot use regular table
| >> salt for its sodium requirement, and that it must first pass through
| >> the vegetable kingdom, and be "chelated".
| >
| > I thought salt doesn't react with anything in any way but first rate
| > gourmet cook claims that salt cannot always be added after cooking and
| > have the same effect.
|
| Why shouldn't salt react? It dissolves easily in water and provides two
| very active ions. There are free (not chelated) sodium and chloride ions
| in your body fluids, and your body doesn't care where they came from.
| Chemical reactions are sensitive to temperature; things that happen
| quickly at cooking temperatures happen more slowly at serving
| temperatures, so I would expect salt in the pot to have at least slightly
| different effects from salt at the table. The food also spends more time
| in the pot or the oven than it does on your plate.
Steven: Being sensible is a violation of the sci.physics manifesto.
|
|
|
|
Author: OverUnityDate: 10:29 08-05-08
|
|
tadchem wrote:
> Note the various definitions here, used for specific cases.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_efficiency
> In all cases, the efficiency is the *ratio* of usable energy output to
> total energy input. Since energy output cannot exceed input,
> efficiency can never be greater than 1.
With less than two pound feet of torque on my car's throttle, I can get
greater than 100 pound feet at the drive wheel. I get more energy out
of my car than I personally put in.
So I'm right and you ALL are wrong, and now I get to call you all names.
||||||||| The preceding parody was posted to make a point. |||||||||
Grow up. You are all smarter than that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact | Electronic Portal
|
|
|
